commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Torsten Curdt <>
Subject Re: Use of final modifiers - WAS svn commit: r1632171 [1/20] - in /commons/proper/beanutils/trunk/src: main/java/org/apache/commons/beanutils/ main/java/org/apache/commons/beanutils/converters/ main/java/org/apache/commons/beanutils/expression/ main/java/org/apache/commons/beanutils/l...
Date Tue, 28 Oct 2014 09:52:21 GMT
> You know that Java has no out variables (as it is call by value) and the
> final identifier does not make an object read only. So in fact having final
> modifiers would misslead you even more.

The last sentence is a bit of theory. I don't see that to be true for me at

Following some of the arguments in this thread declarations like "const" or
"let" are just noise. I could say the same thing about the stupid
"override" annotation everyone keeps using. Taking that a step (or rather a
few steps) further it makes you wonder why some people here prefer a
statically typed language like java over dynamic ones.

Anyway - I do think "final" has value. Not sure I would want to have it
everywhere though.
But the point is: everyone has a different opinion on this.

I have a hard time seeing value in this thread unless there is a more
concrete objective or question to answer.
These could be...

"Are stylistic commits acceptable?"
"Do we want to enforce a common code style?"

Maybe answer those first?


  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message